QUIZ: What's rare about this Crystal Palace view?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 3 Dec 2007 21:17

I was close to owning this stereocard of the palace, but never got round to sending off the £15 payment to the Ebay seller (I normally pay online). Can you figure out what it is about this view that makes it exceptionally rare?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 3 Dec 2007 21:36

There's no mistake about it: this view is rare!

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 3 Dec 2007 21:59

Because it shows the win on the right had side intact which burnt down in 1866. Part of it was rebuilt but the transept wasn't due to lack of funds.

As the palace moved to the park from Hyde park after the First world fair in 1851 it was opened in 1854.

If this isn't the reason it's rare (although I have yet to see any photo of CP intact) then I'd guess its to do with the fountains as these didn't work until 2 years after the palace was opened. The water towers look like the Isambard Kingdom Brunel ones after the original ones were apparently too weak.

I read somewhere that the south water tower was dismantled. Does it still exist somewhere?

If only one part of the crystal palace could be rebuilt I'd suggest rebuilding one water tower with viewing gallery, and restoring some of the fountains. I find the building fascinating partly die to the fact that it is no longer there.

Steve Grindlay · Post by **Steve Grindlay** » 3 Dec 2007 22:04

It shows the north transept, destroyed by fire in 1866? This shows a before and after:

Steve Grindlay · Post by **Steve Grindlay** » 3 Dec 2007 22:05

Sorry, Lee, cross-post.

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 3 Dec 2007 22:06

Nice try, Lee, but...

There's many views that show the North Transept before the 1866 fire.

It might or might not be to do with the fountain.

You are right about the Water Towers.

Can you describe this view?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 3 Dec 2007 22:08

Bad luck, Steve! Maybe somebody else might figure it out... All the big collectors sure missed it, otherwise I think they would have outbid me; I would have definitely lost it before the payment stage.

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 3 Dec 2007 22:43

Edit: I better not give away any clues!

tulse hill terry · Post by **tulse hill terry** » 4 Dec 2007 01:50

Edit: I better not give away any clues!

Classic Falkor. Oh you are such a tease!

The subject of the quiz is a "Pirate" image, there being no actual division between the two frames.

The only "Big Collector" you need worry about is "1924lineone", and he bought a copy almost exactly two years ago, although he has the perplexing habit of buying many multiples of the same item. He also seems to avoid sellers who do not take Paypal, little tip for all you ebay bidders salivating out there!

Falkor, you have to realise that the vast majority of images held and published by Zambra & Negretti the official photographers to the Crystal Palace Company, were created before the North Transept burnt down.

The image you removed, though I'm not sure why, was another example of the Victorians habit of reversing images, no doubt caused by the use of glass plate negatives. This was not picked up by Ian Leith in his book on Delamotte, see page 8, for example. I could give you more proof, though everyone may be asleep by now.

Below is another copy of the image you posted then removed. Hand-colouring not particularly successful as you can see.

I have marked two statues for reference, The (now headless) "Andromeda" in her initial position on the left, and "Venus" by Bertel Thorwaldsen on the right, who never changed her position until seen toppled and providing somewhere to sit in the film "The Pleasure Garden."

In case you wonder why "Andromeda" is shown closer to the upper terrace, further south and facing out to the park in later images, I show you a postcard by Valentines circa 1925-36, showing Andromeda replaced by the "Diana of Versailles", (now headless by the Rangers Hut) and "Venus" by Thorwaldsen still in the same spot. "Diana of Versailles" and her pair, the "Apollo Belvedere" ( base and torso only by the Ranger's hut) were moved from either side of the steps up to the lower terrace sometime after 1873.

Postcard by Russell and Sons, circa 1905-10. The same image as the one you posted and then removed, and the hand-coloured image. Proof as you can see that they must have inherited the archives of Negretti and Zambra.

Do I win a prize?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 4 Dec 2007 10:06

The reason I removed that image was because I noticed it was reversed, and my theory about it became false. Last night, I also happened to notice page 8 when checking that book, since I was on the lookout for reversed images.*

When checking reversed images, it's easier to use the tree for reference as opposed to the statues, depending on the distance away from the garden front. I believe the tree still survives today on the upper terrace.

Postcard by Russell and Sons, circa 1905-10.

Thank you for sharing all these images lately, including the Festival of Empire and other CP Views; any chance of putting up some of your stereoviews as well? I'm already familiar with most CP postcards and books etc.

Do I win a prize?

Nope! You've provided some good information re: statues, although nobody was quite close enough to figuring out what's rare about the so called "pirate image"; I believe it's a genuine stereocard, but not sure why it lacks a division between the two frames (nice observation!). Anyway, after all this discussion about statues and reversed images, it's unlikely that anyone is going to get it now, so I might as well reveal it...

Folkar, you have to realise that the vast majority of images held and published by Zambra & Negretti the official photgraphers to the Crystal Palace Company, were created before the North Transept burnt down.

But try and find one between 1861 and 1866!

*BTW, the image on Page 8 doesn't appear to show a mini-transept or wing!

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 4 Dec 2007 10:32

So the rare thing is the wing?

Any more info on this Falkor, I know they had a covered passage way from the low level station to the palace.

Why did they mirror it on the other side, was this added later, why did they knock it down (was it the damaged in a gale, did a tree fall on it?).

Ah, is that the clue, the mentioned a tree earlier.

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 4 Dec 2007 10:58

So the rare thing is the wing?

Yes--the terminal tower at the end of the wing is gone, but the transept hasn't yet burnt down. Was the wing rebuilt once or twice between 1861 and 1866, or simply repaired both times? A higher quality scan of that stereocard might provide an answer. The back wall still survives as a boundary between the park and caravan site (do pop round there to have a look at it from the other side where you can see an arch).

Any more info on this Falkor, I know they had a covered passage way from the low level station to the palace.

Why did they mirror it on the other side, was this added later, why did they knock it down (was it the damaged in a gale, did a tree fall on it?).

I've sent you a few articles regarding the 1861 north wing destruction and 1866 fire. I can start another topic about the subway if you like...

If by "mirroring" you mean what Terry and I were discussing re: reversed images then don't get confused as we meant something altogether different about how the victorians would sell postcards the wrong way round. The palace was symmetrical, so it's easy for them to con people in this way.

Ah, is that the clue, the mentioned a tree earlier.

Again, that is something else to do with spotting postcards that are the wrong way round. A tree stood on the upper terrace just past the central transept in the north; if the tree is seen left of the centre transept--as opposed to the right--then you know the image is reversed. You can walk along the upper terrace today and you will see the same tree--if not other species of descended plant life--in exactly the same spot.

kennyb2 · Post by **kennyb2** » 4 Dec 2007 11:33

On the subject of statues, many of them were stored in a rundown brick building, in a dell, behind what is now that music stage thing by the little lake,
About the mid 60`s they were all put up for auction along with the flower vases on the terrace,
Another act of vandalism, from the LCC as it was then, So they must have survived somewhere; also there should be a record of what was sold and to whom somewhere?Various headless statues could be found in odd corners then, I remember a battered head rolling about at the bottom of the sports stadium area by the old maze, It was there for years.

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 4 Dec 2007 12:34

Ah, thanks falkor, what you sent looks great, I will look into it. I look forward to one of the walks around the palace ground guided by someone from the Museum sometime.

One separate note, one of the towers was blown up and one was dismantled. What happened to the dismantled one? was it scrapped or does it still exist somewhere?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 4 Dec 2007 13:45

One separate note, one of the towers was blown up and one was dismantled. What happened to the dismantled one? was it scrapped or does it still exist somewhere?

Lee, I've sent you some colour footage showing the north tower being demolished and the south tower being taken down by hand. Also, look out for the upper reservoir, which is now underground and covered over with grass. Let me know when you've downloaded it so I can free up some space. Both towers were probably scrapped I reckon...

leenewham · Post by **leenewham** » 4 Dec 2007 16:04

God it make me want to weep seeing that. Thanks, it was amazing (it's downloaded).

I wonder if it was scrapped or if there is any proof of that. Perhaps it was used. The stone original stone arch for Euston Station is in someones back garden apparently (possibly the most beautiful station in London before it was knocked down to make way for a 'better building').

tulse hill terry · Post by **tulse hill terry** » 6 Dec 2007 15:15

I knew I had an "original" copy of this view, and have nearly given myself a nervous breakdown looking for it, before accepting that I have lost it.

In the process I have found the original source and perhaps why it was able to be "pirated."

This is a glass view, note the same marks in the division. And as proof that images were re-used, in fact a whole archive available many years later, and perhaps lost in the fire of 1936.

Below a scan from a postcard post 1900, my version is unused. Another example of reversing! I used the statues, Luigi Bienaime's "Telemachus" and Bertel Thorvalden's "Mercury" [now headless by the Rangers Hut.]

tulse hill terry · Post by **tulse hill terry** » 6 Dec 2007 15:26

Proof of my shame, from my photocopied catalogue of my collection, just where did I lose it?

Falkor · Post by **Falkor** » 6 Dec 2007 16:21

Well done Terry! That's a nice scan... I'm glad I didn't buy it now. Thanks. First thoughts is that the wing looks a bit different compared to the pre-61 and post-66 wing--I could be wrong.

Another example of reversing! I used the statues, "Telemachus" and Bertel Thorvalden's "Mercury" now headless by the Rangers Hut.

The "Crystal Palace" caption is reversed, although the image appears to be the correct way round. I can tell because of the upper reservoir water tanks seen in the background, which were made from the terminal tower, and of course only stood in the north.

tulse hill terry · Post by **tulse hill terry** » 6 Dec 2007 17:31

The view in question, must have been taken between the collapse of the North Wing in 1861, and the fire that destroyed the south transept, interesting as it provides proof that these glass views were made/issued after paper stereoviews were availiable.

It must show the first rationalisation of the North Wing,the second one including the creation of the Acquarium.

Well-spotted all the same!

Sydenham Town Forum

The Community Voice for London SE26 since 2004

QUIZ: What's rare about this Crystal Palace view?

QUIZ: What's rare about this Crystal Palace view?

False alarm